A comparison between translating into mother tongue and translation into the second language from the perspective of “domestication” and “foreignization” concepts of Venuti Selim Ozan ÇEKÇİ

(1)

Adres Kırklareli Üniversitesi, Fen Edebiyat Fakültesi, Türk Dili ve Edebiyatı Bölümü, Kayalı Kampüsü-Kırklareli/TÜRKİYE e-posta: editor@rumelide.com

Adress

Kırklareli University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Department of Turkish Language and Literature, Kayalı Campus-Kırklareli/TURKEY e-mail: editor@rumelide.com

A comparison between translating into mother tongue and translation into the second language from the perspective of “domestication” and “foreignization”

concepts of Venuti

Selim Ozan ÇEKÇİ¹

APA: Çekçi, S. O. (2020). A comparison between translating into mother tongue and translation into the second language from the perspective of “domestication” and “foreignization” concepts of Venuti.

RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi, (18), 557-567. DOI: 10.29000/rumelide.706353

Abstract

Translation in the 21st century is not just seen as translating grammatical rules, syntaxes, and vocabulary. It is seen as a powerful tool in shaping cultures. In today’s world, countries and cultures do not have equal power, they have unequal cultural power that affects others. All the countries, especially after the 1990’s, realized the importance of the power of their culture. This power is called

“soft power”. In order to reinforce their power and hegemony in the world, countries try to improve their soft powers and try to be culturally effective on the others. This cultural inequality and power relations are studied in Translation Studies because translation is one of the most powerful tools for cultural interactions and relations. In this context, Lawrence Venuti’s “Domestication” and

“Foreignization” concepts are scrutinized to reveal the unequal cultural power interactions via translation. In this regard, by using Javier Franco Aixela’s methodology for translation of Culture- Specific Items, Sait Faik Abasıyanık’s stories and their translations are studied. Story of Sleeping In The Forest’s translation was carried out by a Turkish translator Nilüfer Mizanoğlu Reddy, the other story Such a Story is translated by American translators Joseph and Viola Jakobson. By comparing two of the case studies, it is aimed to find out while translating from Turkish into English whether translation into mother tongue and translation into the second language creates a difference. Besides, whether national origin affects translation tendency towards “Domestication” or “Foreignization” in Venuti’s terms will be /investigated.

Keywords: Domestication and foreignization, Sait Faik Abasıyanık, Lawrence Venuti, culture- specific items.

Venuti’nin “yerlileştirme” ve “yabancılaştırma” kavramlarının perspektifinden anadile ve ikinci dile yapılan çevirilerin bir karşılaştırılması

Öz

21. yüzyılda çeviri artık yalnızca dilbilgisi kurallarının, sözdizimin ve kelimelerin çevirisi olarak görülmemektedir. Kültürleri şekillendiren güçlü bir araç olarak görülmektedir. Bugünün dünyasında ülkeler ve kültürler eşit güçte değillerdir ve diğerlerini etkileyen dengesiz kültürel güçleri vardır. Tüm ülkeler özellikle 1990’lardan sonra kültürlerinin gücünün önemine vardılar. Bu güç “yumuşak güç”

olarak adlandırılmaktadır. Dünyadaki güçlerini ve hegamonyalarını pekiştirmek için ülkeler yumuşak güçlerini artırıp diğer ülkeler üzerinde kültürel olarak etkili olmaya çalışmaktadırlar.

Çeviri, kültürel etkileşim ve ilişkilerde en önemli araçlardan biri olduğu için bu kültürel eşitsizlik ve

1 Arş. Gör., Kırıkkale Üniversitesi, Fen Edebiyat Fakültesi, Batı Dilleri ve Edebiyatları Bölümü, İngilizce Mütercim- Tercümanlık ABD (Kırıkkale, Türkiye), selimozancekci@gmail.com, ORCID ID: 0000-0001-5629-6494 [Makale kayıt tarihi: 06.10.2019-kabul tarihi: 20.03.2020; DOI: 10.29000/rumelide.706353]

(2)

Adress

güç ilişkileri Çeviribilim tarafından çalışılmaktadır. Bu bağlamda, Lawrence Venuti’nin

“Yerlileştirme” ve “Yabancılaştırma” fikirleri çeviri aracılığıyla pekişmiş eşitsiz kültürel güç ilişkilerini ortaya çıkartmak için dikkatle incelenmiştir. Bu bakımdan, Javier Franco Aixela’nın Kültüre Özgü Ögelerin çevirisi için geliştirdiği metodolojiyi kullanarak, Sait Faik Abasıyanık’ın hikayeleri ve bu hikayelerin çevirileri incelenmiştir. Ormanda Uyku hikayesinin çevirisi Türk çevirmen Nilüfer Mizanoğlu Reddy tarafından, diğer bir hikaye olan Öylesine Bir Hikaue ise Amerikalı çevirmenler Joseph ve Viola Jakobson taradından çevrilmiştir. Bu iki örnek incelemesi yapılarak, Türkçe’den İngilizce’ye yapılan çevirilerde anadile çeviri ile 2. Dile çeviri arasında bir farklılık olup olmadığının bulunması amaçlanmıştır. Ayrıca, ulusal kökenin çeviri eğilimininin Venuti’nin “Yerlileştirme” ve

“Yabancılaştırma” üzerinde etkili olup olmadığı bulunmaya çalışılmıştır.

Anahtar kelimeler: Yerlileştirme ve yabancılaştırma, Sait Faik Abasıyanık, Lawrence Venuti, kültüre özgü ögeler.

1. Introduction

While accepting translation as a powerful mean in relations between cultures and countries it should be taken into consideration that the race for dominance has always been the central issue in international relations. Especially in the 20^th and the 21^st centuries, the dominance race has taken a new form by moving away from the hard power to soft power. The term of soft power is firstly conceptualized by Joseph Nye, American political scientist and former adviser of the U.S President Clinton. He (2004) explained the idea as simply as “to do things and control others and to get others to do what they otherwise would not”. He divided the soft power into three categories: ideological, institutional and cultural. Nye (ibid.) claims that “If a state can make its power seem legitimate in the eyes of others, it will encounter less resistance to its wishes.” That is, he argues, “if its culture and ideology are attractive, others will more willingly follow.” (received in 28.05.2019 from https://foreignpolicy.com/)

In the Soft Power context, the Cultural perspective and scope that Translation Studies submit for the studies of international relations are undeniable. Translation Studies was liberated from Linguistics in the 1970s and 1980s. While it was conceived as merely a transference of grammatical structures and words from one language to the other, it started to be accepted as a cultural phenomenon with Cultural Studies’ contributions. This period is subsequently labelled as “the Cultural Turn” in Translation Studies. Andre Lefevere and Susan Bassnett (1995), in their work Translation, History and Culture denounce linguistic methods and approaches in Translation Studies. Their claim was that the phenomenon of translation was no longer merely translating words in texts like the linguistics perceived it. It had to be changed and evolved. Thus, they put forward cultural elements that play a very active role in the translation process. Thereby, they paved the way for the realization of the culture’s role in translation (Çekçi, S. O. 2018: 31).

After contributions of cultural studies in Translation Studies, researches and studies flourished in conjunction with ideology and cultural dominance struggles. One of the prominent scholars was American scholar of Italian descent Lawrence Venuti. His works’ focal point was on cultural shifts and their transference associated with ideology and poetics. Venuti’s famous works started to catch Translation Studies world’s attention in the 1990s. As far as it goes, this decade was not a coincidence.

The 1990s was an important decade for world politics. The world was dominated by two different poles -The Soviets Union’s Communism and The United States of America’s Liberalism- until then but suddenly at the beginning of the 1990s, the balance of the world changed critically. Started earlier,

(3)

Adress

globalization accelerated more than ever before with the collapse of the Soviet Union. The path was open for the Anglo-American side to achieve a colossal soft power in its history. Because of the globalization trend in the world in the 1990s after crucial changes in the world, researching translation and its relation to the nations became the main concern of Translation Studies. Following the cultural turn, the concept of Domestication and Foreignization methods of Venuti were among the new shifts in Translation studies (ibid.)

Due to the fact that Translation Studies cannot be thought without its connections to the contemporary outside world, the events and big changes happening one after another in the world in the 1990s significantly affected research conducted in Translation Studies. And Lawrence Venuti emerged as one of the key scholars in the field in this decade with his studies on ideology and translation. Thus, his works stand for the crucial trends in the 1990s in Translation Studies. Venuti (1998: 340) theorizes translation in order to highlight the relationship between language, subjectivity, discourse; and the difference in culture, ideology, and society. His theory is primarily based on Frederick Schleiermacher’s theory of translation methods of 19^th century which put forwards that “Either the translator leaves the author in peace, as much as possible, and moves the reader towards him; or he leaves the reader in peace, as much as possible, and moves the author towards him” (Lefevere, 1977: 74). Schleiermacher prefers the first method. He brings target readers to the foreign culture. Moreover, by doing so, the reader can learn the foreign text and foreign culture better.

Based on the Schleiermacher’s division of translation methods and theory, Lawrence Venuti comes up with “Domestication” and “Foreignization” methods in translation. Venuti explains the Schleiermacher’s division as:

“Admitting that translation can never be completely adequate to the foreign text, Schleiermacher allowed the translator to choose between a domesticating method, an ethnocentric reduction of the foreign text to target-language cultural values, bringing the author back home, and a foreignizing method, an ethnodeviant pressure on those values to register the linguistic and cultural difference of the foreign text, sending the reader abroad.” (Venuti, 1995: 20).

With his theory in his time, Schleiermacher stood against the French language’s domination over Prussia and feverishly promoted the foreignization method. Likewise, Venuti brought foreignization and domestication methods to Translation Studies and called translators for action to stand up against Anglo-American cultural dominance. In doing so the other cultures could be preserved well (Çekçi. S.

O,2018: 38).

Venuti explained his domestication and foreignization methods in a reciprocal way. He claimed that in the domestication method translator would be transparent and translation fluency improves. It also damages the foreign text by translating partially, by decreasing what translation is required to transfer.

(Venuti, 1995: 21) Venuti criticizes domestication because it engages “an ethnocentric reduction of the foreign text to Anglo-American cultural values” (1995: 20). By selecting the domestication method especially in translating English and the other languages, the translator helps and supports consciously or unconsciously the Anglo-American cultural imperialism. Because this method imposes the English language as superior to others.

Therefore, in return to the domestication method in translation, Venuti introduces and supports the foreignization method in translation. He defines the foreignization method as:

(4)

Adress

“I want to suggest that insofar as foreignizing translation seeks to restrain the ethnocentric violence of translation, it is highly desirable today, a strategic cultural intervention in the current state of world affairs, pitched against the hegemonic English-language nations and the unequal cultural exchanges in which they engage their global others. Foreignizing translation in English can be a form of resistance against ethnocentrism and racism, cultural narcissism and imperialism, in the interests of democratic geopolitical relations.” (Venuti, L. 1995: 20).

In order to understand the purpose of Venuti’s Domestication and Foreignization methods, Anglo- American cultures cultural hegemony and unbalanced power relationships require a further analysis. It can be easily claimed that English is the most dominant language in today’s world everywhere through television, internet, media, publications and it can be thought that the translation action is broadly controlled by the Anglo-American publishing industry which is evident in the translation statistics of countries. According to an article by Richard Lea from The Guardian in the US and the UK in the whole bookshops or libraries, most of the books are written by authors writing in English. He claims that translated fiction constitutes very little percent of the books published in the Anglo-American world. Lea supports his idea by giving the translation statistics of the countries as

“In Germany 13% of books are translations. In France, it's 27%, in Spain 28%, in Turkey 40% and in Slovenia 70%, but in Britain and America, the best estimates suggest that the fraction of books on the shelves which started off in another language is somewhere around only two percent. One measure of the lack of interest in translated literature from both the government and the industry is that Britain is the only country in Europe that doesn't produce any statistics on translation.” (received in 28.05.2019 from https://www.theguardian.com)

It is not surprising that Venuti opts for the foreignization method. In order to detect the two different translators’ (one native Turkish and one Native American) methods in Sleeping In the Forest of Sait Faik Abasıyanık translation of Culture-Specific Items are to be scrutinized in the translations and to be compared.

In the methodology part, translation of Culture-Specific Items from the Franco Aixela’s terms will be explained briefly.

2. Methodology

In 1996, in Translation Power Subversion by Román Alvarez and M. Carmen-África Vidal compiled articles in Translation Studies field focusing on power and subversion. One of the articles gathered attention by the translation scholars called “Culture-specific Items in Translation” by Javier Franco Aixela. Aixela explains Culture-specific items in his article as:

“Culture-specific items are usually expressed in a text by means of objects and of systems of classification and measurement whose use is restricted to the source culture, or by means of the transcription of opinions and the description of habits equally alien to the receiving culture.” (Aixela J. F. 1996: 56).

Accepting this definition of the Culture-Specific Items (from now on they are going to be referred to the CSI) as a base for this study it can be inferred that the CSIs can create difficulties in translation especially between the cultures that are not familiar with each other. According to Aixela, the translation of the CSIs may create a problem when a CSI of the source text is transferred to the target text but equivalence for this item is not in found or different value is given for the item in the target language and culture (ibid.). Since Turkish culture and American culture are studied in this case, it is expected to create some difficulties for both of the translators of Sait Faik Abasıyanık.

(5)

Adress

For the translation of the CSI Aixela proposes different strategies from two different perspectives;

conservation or substitution. In conservation there are strategies as Repetition which repeats the CSI in the target text (for instance Ankara – Ankara), Orthographic Adaptation which changes the letters of the word and makes the word readable for the target audience (for instance Ayşe – Ayshe), Linguistic Translation refers to translation of CSI belonging to source culture that is already known by target culture via pre-translations (for example 50 Lira – 50 Liras), Extratextual Gloss which means giving endnote, footnote, etc. and Intratextual Gloss referring to the explanation of a CSI within the text (for instance, iskender – doner with yogurt and hot butter topping).

Figure 1. Conservation Strategies for Translation of CSIs

Embracing mostly these methods in translation will reveal that the translator adopted the foreignization method in Lawrence Venuti’s term because it conserves the Turkish cultural items and so Turkish culture. Thus, Turkish culture is preserved when translated into American culture.

On the other hand, translator can choose the substitution methods in many ways as; a) Synonymy in which a CSI is not translated but a synonym word is used in translation (for example sağlıcakla kal – may you live long), b) Limited Universalization which is used in conditions like when the CSI is not known well in target culture, translator decides to use more appropriate or more usual CSI belongs to source culture for translating (for example Padişah – Sultan), c) Absolute Universalization which is like Limited Universalization but in the same conditions translator uses CSI belonging to the target culture not source culture again (for instance halay çekmek, dance in a circle), d) Naturalization in which translator naturalizes the source text by eliminating its originality and authenticity of source CSI (for instance türkü – folk song), e) Deletion refers to deleting CSI while translating and f) Autonomous Creation refers to creation of a CSI in target text that is not found in the source text to attract readers’

attention (Çekçi, 2018).

(6)

Adress

Figure 2. Substitution Strategies for Translation of CSIs

When a translator uses the methods termed subbranches of substitution of Aixela, it demonstrates that the translator embraces the domestication method of Venuti. That is because embracing substitution eradicates the target text for the sake of target readers’ tastes and preferences. The subbranches of substitution cause a loss in the meaning of source culture. Within the scope of this study,the stories of Sait Faik Abasıyanık are translated for the taste of Anglo-American reader and thus cultural essence of the stories are deteriorated.

In the case study, Sait Faik Abasıyanık’s two different stories translated into English by two different translators; one translating into native language the other translating into the second language will be scrutinized. Afterwars, with the methodology put forward by Aixela their translation strategies of the CSIs will be compared. At the end of the comparison, it is aimed to find out which translation is

“Domesticated” and which translation is “Foreignized”.

3. Case Study

Sait Faik Abasıyanık is a very well-known and prestigious Turkish writer. Although his works vary from poetry to stories, from poetry to stories, he is best known for his short stories. Sait Faik studied at İstanbul University, Faculty of Literature (1928-30) and in France. That is why his French is very good and along with being a writer, he is a French-Turkish translator as well. After he studied in France, he returned back to İstanbul in 1935 and worked as a lecturer at the Armenian Orphan School for a while Although he worked with his father as a trader he didn’t like it and started to work as a journalist for a short while. After that job with his father’s financial support, he could live in his family residence in Burgaz Island in summers together with his mother. (received in 30.05.2019 from http://www.kultur.gov.tr)2.

Living on the Island affected his writing hugely. He hugged the identity of the islander and loved the life in Burgaz Island and Istanbul so much. His love and passion for the city and island can be clearly observed in his stories. He mostly used the island and the city as a set and people of the city and the island as the characters for his stories.

2 Translation of this part belongs to me

(7)

Adress

His short stories were successful in Turkey and a selection of them was translated and published by Syracuse University Press in the U.S.A., New York for the American readers. There are different stories compiled from his different storybooks. And there is more than one translator who is both Turkish that knows English and American that knows Turkish. In the scope of this study, one Turkish and two American translators’ translated short stories from Sleeping In the Forest book are selected. Firstly,

“Öyle Bir Hikaye” of Sait Faik from his book Alemdağda Var Bir Yılan and the American translators Joseph and Viola Jakobson’s translation “Such A Story” is scrutinized with Aixela’s methods. Then,

“Ormanda Uyku” from Sarnıç book and its translation by Nilüfer Mizanoğlu Reddy “Sleeping In The Forest” will be scrutinized accordingly the same methods and their results will be compared. In the following part the Öyle Bir Hikaye and its translation will be compared;

3.1. Öyle Bir Hikaye – Such a Story Table 1Such a Story.

Source Text Target Text

Canım bir yürümek istiyordu ki… Şöförün biri:

-Atikali, Atikali! Diye bağırdı.

Page 1

I really did want to take a walk… A passing dolmuş taxi driver called:

-Atikali Atikali!

Page 157

The passage is taken from the beginning of the story. In Turkey, there is a mean of transportation that is only found in Turkey called “dolmuş”. It is some kind of vehicle between the taxi and the bus and it is operated by a private person. As it is not found in the American culture, the translator explains the word by using the Intratextual Method.

Table 2 Such a Story.

-Deli gibi be abi! Gün onunla ağarıyordu. Ben susamhelvası satarım abi gündüzleri. Cebin de mis gibi simit kokuyor abi.

Page 3

“Like crazy, brother! Dawn broke with her! I sell sesame halvah daytimes. Brother, your pocket smells sweet like simits.

Page 157

In this part, the narrator hides a killer in his pocket from the police. The killer is speaking from the narrator’s pocket and he is telling his story of murder and his daily life. In the source text Turkish foods susamhelvası and simit are used. In the American version, the translator used the Linguistic translation method for the “sesame halvah” and Repetition method for “simit”.

Hidayet o akşam süslenmiş, Taksim’e çıkmıştı.

On sekiz lira otuz yedi kuruş parası vardı.

Bir meyhaneye girdi içti de içti.

Page 4

That night, Hidayet had got all decked out. He went to Taksim. He Had eighteen lira, thirty-seven kuruş in his pocket.

He entered a bar, drank and drank.

Page 158

At this chapter Hidayet, the killer, continues telling his story. The translator used the Repetition method for Taksim, a very famous district of Istanbul. The translator used the Repetition method also for the currency of Turkey, Lira, and Kuruş. Actually, in English lira is used as it is, however, while translator

(8)

Adress

could have used an orthographic translation for Kuruş, a smaller unit of money than Lira, s/he decided to leave it and repeat. In “meyhane” however, it is translated with the Absolute Universalization method as a “bar” removing some cultural meaning of the source text CSI, and this type of translation method is subbranch of substitution.

“Cıgaramın dumanı, yoktur yarin imanı/ Altından köşk yaptırdım, gümüşten merdivanı” türküsünü bağıra bağıra söyleyerek uzaklaşırken arkamdan sesleniyordu.

Page 7

As I walked away singing, “My cigarette smoke, no faith in the beloved, I build a kiosk of gold with silver stairs” he called after me.

Page 162

In this part, the narrator tells his encounter with a drunk young boy. The boy is singing a Türkü, local music of Turkey. The translator does not mention “türkü” in the target text and applies the Deletion method.

-Belli belli amca, dedi. Suratında nur kalmamış.

Kızdım.

-Nurum içimde oğlum, dedim, içim pırıl pırıl Page 9

“It is obvious uncle,” he said, “there’s no light left in your face.”

I was angry:

“My light is inside my body,” I said “shining away”.

Page 165

This part is also the conversation between the narrator and the drunk young boy. “Nur” in Turkish refers to a holistic light that shows how pure and clean the person and person’s soul is. The translator translated with the Naturalization method and transferred it directly to the target reader.

In the second case study, Turkish translator Nilüfer Mizanoğlu Reddy’s translation of Ormanda Uyku's story will be scrutinized.

3.2. Ormanda Uyku – Sleeping in The Forest Table 6 Sleeping in The Forest.

Ormanda Uyku Sleeping in the Forest

Çam ormanını boylu boyunca geçtim. Şimdi bir küçük kır kahvesinin setleri üstündeydim. Birdenbire bir çardağın altında cıgara pırıltıları gördüm.

Page 65

I crossed the pine forest from one end to the other. I found myself on the terrace of a small outdoor cafe. All of a sudden I saw sparks of cigarettes under a trellis.

Page 177

This story of Sait Faik is a monologue, mostly the narrator tells his dream and explains himself and his thoughts throughout the dreams. At this part of the story the narrator continuous telling his journey.

“Kır kahvesi” is a place referring to a local, country coffee house. The feature of “kahve” in Turkish culture is profound. Differently from American culture, this kind of place is generally located in even the smallest village constituting its social life mostly among men. By translating “Kır kahvesi” as “small outdoor café” the translator adopted the naturalization method.

(9)

Adress

Table 7 Sleeping in The Forest.

Çocukluğumda okuduğum bir kitapta bir süvari, karlı bir ovada giderken, bir direk görür. Atını bu direğe bağlar, gocuğunu kafasına çeker, uyurdu.

Page 67

In a book I had read in my childhood, a rider traveling on a snow-covered plain sees a pole. He tethers his horse to this pole, covers himself with his sheepskin coat and goes to sleep.

Page 179

The narrator continues telling his story by adding a childhood memory of his. “Gocuk” means cloak which is generally made of sheepskin and worn by a shepherd. In this case, the translator translates the word as “sheepskin coat” and adopts the Intratextual gloss method by adding the “sheepskin” word to the target text.

Napolili kumarbazla İstanbul Yeni Cami merdivenlerinde uyuyan küfeci, şehvet ve tembellik içinde bedbaht ve iyi… Şimalli zengin ve kötü…

Page 69

The gambler in Naples and the porter who sleeps on the steps of Yeni Cami in İstanbul are miserable but good in their sensuality and laziness. And the northerner is rich and bad.

Page 180

In this part, the narrator compares the people from the north and the people from the south. The translator translated a place specific to Turkish culture “İstanbul Yeni Cami” as “Yeni Cami in İstanbul”.

Thus, although the syntax is changed grammatically, the translator repeated the CSI. Therefore, it can be claimed that the translator used the Repetition method.

Kafamın altına iki elimin avcunu koyuyor, evvela koyu sıcak bir çay, kızarmış ekmek, beyaz delikli bir peynir, bir bardak su, bir salkım üzüm. Sonra insanları, hayatı, yemişleri ve dünyayı, nefes alıp vermeyi, şehveti düşünüyorum.

Page 69

I place the palms of my two hands behind my head. First of all, I think of a cup of well-steeped, hot and dark tea, a slice of toast, a piece of white cheese with holes, a glass of water, and a bunch of grapes. Then, I think about people, life, all kinds of fruit and the world.

Page 181

The narrator talks about his dream. “Koyu sıcak bir çay” is translated as “a cup of well-steeped, hot and dark tea”. Turkey is the biggest consumer of black tea in the world and it is always consumed as well- steeped. In this part, although it is not mentioned in the original version, the translator added this part in translation to explain the reader. Thus, the translator used the Intratextual gloss method for the translation of this CSI.

İçime bir acı yapışırdı. Bu sabah gün doğmadan dükkan açıp ilk müşterinin parasını sakalına sürecek bir çarşı içi Müslümanı kadar erken uyanmıştım.

Page68

This gave me a feeling of despair. But, this morning I got up as early as a Muslim tradesman who opens his shop in the Bazaar before sunrise and strokes his beard with the money he receives from his first customer.

Page 180

(10)

Adress

The Turkish word “Çarşı” means “market” in English. “Bazaar” adds Oriental meaning, it refers to the market place in the Middle East. Although in the original text it is used simply as “market”, in translation, the translator underlines the market is in the Middle East and adds extra information to the reader. Thus, by giving extra information within the text translator adopts the Intratextual gloss method.

4. Conclusion

In this study it is aimed to find out different strategies adopted by two different translators, namely one being a Turkish translator translating to her second language, English, and the other being an American couple translating into their mother tongues.

The research question was to determine the strategies adopted in two different cultures according to Lawrence Venuti’s translation terms as to “Domestication” or “Foreignization”. These strategies were used mainly for translations into English. They dictate two ends as to one domesticating the language of a “weaker” foreign culture by making the text fluent for the English through the elimination of culture specific items/cultural elements. This method was highly criticized by Lawrence Venuti because it was ignoring and trivializing the other cultures by removing cultural essences for the sake of the Anglo- American reader.

The other method was “Foreignizing” which was supported by Venuti and he made a call for action the translators to adopt this strategy. This strategy was basically keeping foreign cultural elements while translating into English and preserving the uniqueness of the foreign by not removing or changing the culture specific items that may sound strange for the English reader

This study compared two translators: One is Turkish and translating into the second language, the other ones were American and translating into their first language. By evaluating their translations with Aixela’s methodology for translation of Culture-Specific Items, I came to conclusion that the Turkish translator preserves Turkish culture by keeping the cultural elements as they are in the original. Thus, the Turkish translator adopts the “Foreignization” method and conserves the Turkish culture while it is translated into a foreign, American Culture. On the other hand, American translators have more tendency in the “Domestication” method while translating foreign Turkish culture into their own American culture by changing, deleting or altering Turkish cultural elements.

To sum up, although it cannot be asserted that Turkish translator preserved all of the Turkish cultural items and American translator changed all of them; it is revealed that the Turkish translator translates in line with “Domestication” method by preserving more of the original and American translators apply

“Foreignization” method by changing the cultural elements further.

References

Bassnett, S., & Lefevere, A. (1995). Translation, History and Culture. London: Cassel.

Çekçi, S. O. (2018). Analysis of Idioms and Culture Specific Items in The English Translation of Yaşar Kemal’s Ince Memed (Master's Thesis). Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey.

Faik, S. (2019). Sarnıç. İstanbul: İş bankası Kültür.

Faik, S. (2019). Alemdağda Var Bir Yılan. İstanbul: İş bankası Kültür.

Faik, S., & Halman, T. S. (2004). Sleeping in the forest: Stories and poems. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.

(11)

Adress

Franco Aixelà, Javier (1996). Culture-specific items in translation. Román Álvarez and Carmen A. Vidal (eds). Translation, Power, Subversion. (pp. 52-78). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Munday, J. (2008). Introducing Translation Studies: Theories and applications. Routledge: New York and London.

Nye, J. S. (2004). Soft power: The means to success in world politics. New York: Public Affairs.

Venuti, L. (1998). The Scandals of Translation: Towards an Ethics of Difference. New York: Routledge.

Venuti, L. (1995). The Translator’s Invisibility: A History of Translation. London: Routledge.

Online Sources

Foreign Policy. https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/08/20/the-rise-and-fall-of-soft-power/, Retrieved 28.05.2019.

The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/books/2007/nov/16/fiction.richardlea, Retrieved 28.05.2019.

Republic Of Turkey Ministry of Culture and Tourism. http://www.kultur.gov.tr/EN- 118042/abasiyanik-sait-faik.html, Retrieved 30.05.2019.